People have used the Godhead as a pivotal point in doctrine. Some have even started their own religion because they did not like the Bible's portrayal of the Godhead, or its guide to holiness.
Muhammad started the Islam religion, Joseph Smith the Mormons, Charles Russell the Jehovah Witnesses and Mary Baker Eddy the Christian Science. There are also many others.
These religions provide subjectively, (emotional), motivated results. In a relative sense there are little worthwhile or lasting results. This is because they are not based on historically proven fundamental Christian values. All of these doctrines have some outlet, or deviation, which makes allowances for the base carnal desires. Yet, they supposedly avoid any negative, eternal, consequences. Here are some of their perversions.
The Muslims promise that each of their men followers will find three perpetual virgins in heaven who will take care of their desires. (They also can have four wives in this life.) As a result their women do not receive Christian respect. Many Muslims think it is good for children to take a stand for their religion, even for the very young to fight and die.
A Mormon teacher told me that if I have a vocabulary of 1000 curse words, and would just discipline myself into not using one of them and so reduce that vocabulary, I would be becoming more like God.
Their original leaders were supposed to be nearly infallible were heavily into polygamy and were prejudiced against the black races, They also condoned stealing from - and killing unbelievers.
A Jehovah witness told me that when we die our sins will be forgotten and only then will we cease to sin. They do not accept Jesus as being God. (There are points in the theology of the Godhead that are overlooked by Christians which the Jehovah Witnesses have attempted to deal with. I will deal with this near the end of this article.)
Christian science does not admit that sin is a literal reality or motivated by a wicked heart; they teach rather that it is just a misunderstanding, or an error of the mind and that death is only an illusion.
None of these religions allow for any plurality in a singular all powerful God.
The Mormons believe that both God and Jesus have bodies of flesh and bone.
The other three deny that Jesus Christ is God.
The Muslims have adhered to Muhammad's extremely edited version of the Bible, along with his writings and they believe that the name of God is Allah. They do not believe that God was beget, or beget a son or that there is any plurality in the Godhead. They believe that Jesus was a lesser prophet then Muhammad and so his (Muhammad's) writings are to be followed. Many of the Muslim's record of the sayings of Mohammed have been rewritten/changed from the original.
The Mormons today think that only Joseph Smith and other of their prophets and apostles have given the true understanding of the Godhead. As a result they do not rely on the Bible. Yet, they have made major, (pages of), changes to the writings of their early leaders and have changed some of their basic doctrines.
The Jehovah Witnesses have had a problem with the Trinity Doctrine and they have edited or translated from the Greek text their own version of the Bible. They stayed with the body of the scriptures. However they took considerable liberty in their translation. It is obvious that they have done so with preconceived notions.
Then we have the Christians who have not tampered with the text of the Bible. But who still have had a problem in accepting any plurality in the Godhead. They have, as a result, developed various ways of explaining away any plurality. They appear to think that if they do not do this there would be grievous contradictions in the scriptures. These Christians are honest; however some of them are very dogmatic in their defense of the singularity and total oneness of God. (There are honest questions that are not answered by Christian theologians.)
Whenever some people hear the term Trinity they immediately think this is referring to three Gods.
Some Oneness believers think (just like the Muslims), that anyone who believes there is any plurality in the Godhead, is a pagan.
There are many Christians who have embraced the Trinitarian concept of God, who do not understand the foundation of that doctrine and this is because too many of their teachers have failed to disclose the fundamental or biblical reasons for its existence... Which are generally interpreted by Bible scholars as ...
1. The Bible explicitly teaches that God is one singular God and there is none beside him.
2. It also reveals and teaches by implication that there is, in some sense, a wonderful plurality in the one singular God.
3. God, a singular being, is spoken of as if he were three separate individual persons, or consciences.
Each having the complete separate faculties of an individual being, or person.
However, though separate, each are individually the total essence of God. Or they are each the totality of God in one person.
Touch one and you have touched them all and you have also touched the one singular God.
If you receive Jesus or God, or the Holy Spirit, you have received the One Singular Almighty God.
I have heard several popular Trinitarian teachers (in essence), warn their followers of neglecting the worship of the Father by focusing too much on Jesus. These unfortunate situations and teachings are probably the main reason for the existence of the extremist Christian Oneness groups.
Both the Trinity doctrines and the Oneness doctrines, in many cases, appear to be emphasized to the point of worship or at the least an obsession by many of their adherents. Their over emphasis of these doctrines has put them in bondage and has separated them from other Christians.
In some Trinity churches you can hear the term trinity so often that you might think it is the name of their God. In the Oneness churches you can hear Acts two thirty eight so often that it appears that they consider baptism in Jesus name to be the first cause of their salvation.
These doctrines are used as a point of nonsensical discrimination between those who have accepted them and those who have not. In one case the Bible as it reads is being adhered to despite what some feel are contradictions, while those in the other case feel that this form of literal adherence is a contradiction.
Both extremes of these views teach that the other side is denying the deity of Christ and is of the Anti-Christ. They also say that those of the opposite view are worshipping another Jesus.
(Note; Muslims and Jews are anti-Christ, for they believe Jesus was not God and in a general sense they hate the Christian religion. (This is not true of every individual Muslim or Jew.)
More and more of their teachers are becoming familiar with the fact that Christians do not present a solid front when defending their doctrines of the Godhead. Judaism and Mohammedanism, both emphasis the simplicity of their approach to One Supreme God, - in contrast Christians appear to be confused about the confusing doctrine of the Trinity, etc. )
Ignorance of the proper methods of interpretation, along with a lack of communication and forbearance, makes many Christians look like idiots.
In to many cases these extremes of doctrine are used as a way to control Christian people, just as perverted pagan religions do. For they warn their followers to stay away from those other ungodly churches. It is too often said by the extremists on both sides that if you do not believe their version of the Godhead you are not a Christian. Unfortunately the emphasis of most churches is put on something other then obedience to the moral laws of God, as Christ outlined them in Matthew 5, 6, and 7.
There are Churches that seldom use the term Trinity; yet, (in essence) they believe the same thing.
It should be noted that there are numbers of individual Christians and some few independent churches who claim to be of the oneness persuasion, who do believe in the plurality of the Godhead. They either do not agree with Trinity terminology or they do not see that there is any essential reasons for its redundant use. Some believe as I do that there is often too much emphasis put on the plurality of the Godhead, accompanied by a lack of solid teaching on the subject.
We feel that as a result Christians in general do not use the terminology properly and so create and perpetrate error and unnecessary division.
First Timothy 6:16 Genesis chapter 18. and Revelations 4. and 5.
Many of us also feel that to teach that the acceptance of a Triune God, is essential to our salvation is to in effect teach that we are saved by something other then God alone.
To misunderstand the mystery of the Godhead will not of itself keep anyone out of heaven. Yet this is said to be the case by both camps of these over zealous Godhead teachers.
The fact that there is one God is to be of primary consideration when teaching. As to how He is one is of secondary importance.
(The power of God, or His ability to procreate is a factor that is not fully explored, relative to this subject. Can God, in some sense, make a clone of Himself? The Bible as we have it portrays, in some sense, a plurality in the Godhead, and it also teaches us to understand that even Christ will/would/did at some point step aside, so that God would be seen as all in all. In Him we all move and have out being.)
The Bible does portray these distinctions; but not by commandment or with such emphasis or force.
In contrast there are commandments which declare that God is to be approached as one God.
The true spirit of Anti-Christ demands that you deny the deity of Christ or go to hell. Because of this, it is near blasphemous to say that other God fearing Christians are of the Anti-Christ. Let me add, - based on the text of the Bible as we have it - it is dangerous to judge those who fail to understand the Godhead, it is even dangerous to do this to those who, do in some sense, deny Christ's deity. There are extreme variations among those who say they are orthodox.
The fact that the name of God is to be considered as one name is to be a primary consideration.
His many names are not to be thought of as contradictory of his one name. Rather, they are to be understood as being secondary to that fact. He has one singular primary name and this primary name is that name which is above every other name. To say "Jehovah is salvation" focuses the mind on the grace of God, in contrast to depending on the law or trying to earn salvation. His other names are well known adjectives, and are descriptive of His singular being, persons and position.
Nevertheless, they are still to be revered whenever they are used to refer to Him.
(Further down in this article I will ask you some questions relative to the one name of God.)
The Muslims hate the Jews because they killed Jesus and they think Christians are pagans because they worship three Gods. They also note that Jesus was to return soon and since this supposedly did not happen they believe that the NT has been tampered with.
They do not understand that Jesus did return, and, (that in a sense) all people are guilty for the death of Christ and that the Christian God is one singular God. They fail to understand this because of the confusion portrayed by Christians on these subjects.
David said about God that he could not go any place where God was not already. The New Testament says that in Him we move and have our being. Jesus told Philip that when you see me you have seen the Father and then in another setting, Christ asked them for what good work do you stone me? The Jews answered; not for a good work, but because that you being a man make yourself God.
God was able to reveal his love for the world through the death of his Son. God used the revelation of His Son and His Spirit for the good of the universe.
God used His Son on the cross as a means of revealing his love and salvation. This is a very precious aspect of Christianity that has no equal among other religions, for in it there is the forgiveness of sins and the thought that we must forgive others, also.
The Bible reveals that it was necessary for God to have an intermediary between Himself and His creation. The Son had to come to communicate salvation to us.
He provided redemption through the cross and he also revealed the love of God to his people by the cross. (There are many unanswered questions, but did God have other choices?)
The reverence that is to be shown toward His name is not because of the term that it represents or because of some inherent power that is released by the mouthing of that name. But it is that -
He chose a certain primary name for himself and.. He is the qualifying basis, or the reason for the specific reverence of that specific name.
This reverence is not due when someone else is referred to by that same name. But it is always due whenever God is referred to, by any of His names.
It is wrong to refer to God and joke around in a light and foolish manner, acting as if you are praying to him
God is love, but he is also a consuming fire.
The more prominent that illogical erroneous cults become the more obvious it is that these considerations have to be reckoned with and observed.
It has been taught there has seldom, if ever, been any historical inspired intelligent Godly Jews or Christians who thought that God was any kind of a plurality, until about the third century. However, I have read about some comments made by Jewish scholars who lived and died before Christ was born. They were then proclaiming a plurality in God.
Then in my own personal Bible study in the Old testament I had to be honest and deal with some Bible verses which also pointed toward the plurality of the Godhead.
I hope to make some limited yet pertinent contribution to this subject and thereby provoke the more learned students to empathize with us. I am also hoping that Bible students will then put more effort into promoting a stable, balanced and easily digested presentation of the subject.
Eventually there will be relaxed discussions between those who hold different view points.
There are several seemingly contradictory statements made about God and His Son in the Bible.
Here is a list of some of them, with some scriptures that are involved.
Is there only one true God?
Is there Plurality in God?
Or Does the Old Testament speak of God or Jehovah praying to or speaking to Jehovah, or of Jehovah sending Jehovah, or the like?
Note; God made man in His own image. Singular.
Was Jesus, in some sense, with God, or along side of God, at the time the worlds were framed? Yes. Saint John 1:1 and 17:5
Was Jesus, in some sense, the one singular God of creation? Yes. Colossians 1:16.
Was Jesus just in the mind of God? Only a thought or a plan? No. Saint John 17:5
Was, or is, Jesus, alone, the singular all powerful God, with no other essence, conscience or person of God with him? No. Note the terms "we" etc.
Saint John 17:18 -25.
These statements are made on the basis of the text as we have received it, not necessarily as it was authored. Jesus was and is the Wisdom of God. He is and was the "Logos." Which means He was the very thought, intent and plans of God. He was not God in the sense of being every aspect of the Godhead in a physical body, for this was impossible. God fills the universe. However, taken as it reads Jesus was given the supreme position relative to us and our God. Do not forget this! He was given ....
(The last two are in the plural). In Genesis 18 & 19, The Lord and two angels visited Abraham and promised him a child; later the Lord said that he was going down to see about Sodom and Gomorra. At that time the two angels went on ahead while Abraham talked to the Lord. This is where Abraham interceded for those cities. The context there implies that Jehovah on the earth directed Jehovah in heaven. Note Judges 6: 11-23 and -
Read the following scriptures carefully for they seem to reveal a plurality. Who is this angel? The Pre-incarnate Son of God?
(The Lord is going to live among them.)
Many people will be joined to the Lord in that day and will become His people and will become the people of this Angel. Is the Angel that is speaking here the pre-incarnate Christ? Here and in Isaiah 48 below* it speaks of an Angel as if he were Jehovah. He will do things for Jehovah and he will live among Israel and they will be the Lord's and this angel's people.
In the following the Lord speaks about the Lord.
Jesus was both divine and human. Still it was not his flesh or human nature that was with God before the worlds were framed. He God, was with God. St. John 1:1.
The Godhead is more than one person with two natures.
Gods name one name?
(The underlined words "Lord'' above are all translated from the Hebrew word 'Jehovah', the self existing one. It is easy for Christians who are steeped in their traditions to fail to note that Jesus was given His self existing position. God seen to it that He had life within Himself. Here is a point that crucifies the extreme Oneness Position, those who hold to it based on the text. In a sense the almighty God, the One Singular Self Existent One gave His Almighty-ness to His Son, along with His Name.)
Did Jesus manifest or reveal the name of God to the world?
What was the name that the apostles preached to people?
At this point I would like to point out that in their prayers they only addressed the singular God in the singular; If they prayed to Jesus it was still in the singular.
For example they did not say, "would you all hear my petition."
Jehovah Is the dominant name of God in the old testament and the name "Jesus" means ``Jehovah is salvation''.
preaching the Lord Jesus.
Yes, they preached in the authority of the name of Jesus, but they also preached Christ, the Lord Jesus, and about the name of Jesus.
What singular given name is dominant in the New Testament?
Were the terms Father Son And Holy Spirit ever proclaimed by the Apostles as being the one specific singular name of God? Or is the name of God insignificant?
When the term name is used as referring to the sum total of the character and personality of the person, does this mean that all of the names of God have the same significance? Or was the name "Jesus" given a special significance above the others?
Is the name "Jesus'' the only name whereby we can be saved?
Is the name `"Jesus" the name that identified God's people in the new Testament?
Do everything in the name of Jesus?
In my Father's name? *
Which is to say they were against Jehovah's, Jehovah.
Jesus keeps referring to his name as if his name had some special significance. He says ask in my name, yet he could have said just ask me.
Did they call on the singular Name of God during Baptism?
Or what singular given name did God authorize?
The word translated here as "in" comes from the Greek word epi. Strongs # 1909. Epi means: on, upon, over, because of, on behalf of or towards.
(Please note, the word "into" in these passages, comes from the greek word eis. strongs # 1519. It is pronounced ice. It means in, into, to or at. The context of these scriptures supports the use of the name Jesus, literally or directly. Peter told them to be baptized in, into, to, at and for the purpose of, the name of Jesus.)
Did God make Jesus both Lord and Christ?
Is Jesus the singular God and the singular creator?
(The Son was to be called the everlasting Father?)
Jesus was to be worshipped by angels.
He was begotten, not created.
(Again - One powerful, but very often overlooked, aspect of the Godhead is that Jesus was given His position and it was one of preeminence and His name was also given this highest place, over all other names.
Is the Holy Ghost God?
He over shadowed the virgin Mary and she brought forth the Son of God. There are a lot of other references. II Corinthians 3:17. Acts 5:3&4. Hebrews 10:15 & 16. & Jeremiah 31:33 & 34.(There is a scriptural basis for speaking of the Spirit Of God or the Holy Ghost as being the breath of God. This removes the contention of their being two entities, both Spirit in the Godhead.)
Did God shed His blood for us?
Is God our savior?
Is Jesus the savior?
Is God the beginning and the end?
Does the Bible say that no man hath seen God or that no man can see Him and live?
These scriptures are keys; for it is impossible for us to accurately portray God. He is beyond our comprehension and it is an act of unbelief to try.
Does the Bible say that some men saw God?
These scriptures intimate to us that in some sense God has revealed His form to men. In another sense, we cannot see the fulness of God.
They saw God, yet they did not see God?
Does the Bible speak of God and then in the same sentence speak of his, redeemer, as being the Lord of hosts?
Lord = Jehovah. Strongs # 3068
Both the Lord and His redeemer say these things.
These scriptures can be interpreted in such a way as to remove any implied plurality. However, here in the King James version the plurality is supported.
To use our finite understanding of the infinite God as a point of discrimination against other God fearing Christians who may be mistaken, but have honest scriptural differences, is foolishness.
When the disciples looked upon Jesus they (in some sense), saw God.
He was both divine and human; still, the plurality, and the singularity, and totality of God, in some sense, involves more then just the singular person and physical body of Jesus.
Who is the Lord of Hosts?
The following are some additional scriptures which point both to the oneness and the plurality of God.
To whom would a devout Jew like Paul address a prayer? Answer: Only to Jehovah!
John 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
Act 13:38 ``Be it Known unto you therefore, men and brethern, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins.
17:31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men in that he hath raised him from the dead.
19:17 And this was known to all the Jews and Greeks also dwelling at Ephesus; and fear fell on them all, and the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified.
Romans 5:11 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ by whom we have now received the atonement.
You Call Him Daddy. But What Is His Name?
There are numbers of religions and they all have their God. Many of them also have Father, Son, Mother and Spirit figures in their Godhead. This demands that we designate our God from those others by His personal name.
Remember, Mary was told by the Angel to name her child "Jesus": Luke 1:31, And since He is God, and the son of God, it is reasonable to assume that "Jesus" is the name of God. To say otherwise could be honestly construed as a denial of His deity.
Generally, when the plurality of God was revealed in the Old Testament one singular name was used for both God, his redeemer and His Angel. Examples Above.
The Jehovah the redeemer, and the Jehovah of hosts. This logic supports the commandment to use the name "Jesus" in prayer and in any other religious injunction, such as baptism; and gives the reason for doing so.
Who is it that promotes doctrines that distance us from Christ? We should never accept doctrines which diminish the position of Jesus or his name.
God gave him the preeminence!
The term Christian covers born again spirit filled believers. In essence, what ever righteous acts they perform is done in the name of Jesus.
The main ministry of the Holy Spirit is to edify Jesus. However, we have been so conditioned by our limited finite logic, along with the Trinity perspective, that it is hard for us to let Jesus be the God.
We are to receive him as God and to worship him as God with no reservation. Again, We should never feel any kind of apprehension when we continually worship Jesus as our God.
For when we do this we are not neglecting God or His Holy Spirit; remember - God gave Jesus the supreme position. Philippians. 2:9-11 &
If you are filled with the Holy Ghost then you are filled with God and his Christ; for, God, in some sense, is not limited by time or space. This has to do with the spiritual reality of being at one with God, in faith, deed, principle, etc. It transcends physical limitations and description.
When the Angel of Jehovah was with the Children of Israel He was Jehovah. However Jehovah was still in heaven. Exodus 23:20 & 21 and 33:2-5 & 14. Also note Page 5.
It is rather obvious that we have a lack of faith when we struggle with the thought that the fulness of the Godhead is in Christ.
Jehovah's name is one. (Or his primary name is one.
This name Jehovah is the very personal or specific name of God.) The Father Son and Holy Ghost are one and yet, three. Which is one God in three persons, or three separate personalities, each having separate faculties, yet in some sense of being they are one in substratum of substance. This is a very inadequate description and tends to, and has very often produce much error. However, I have not come across anything better. I am basing this on the Bible text as it reads. So, if you touch one you have touched the other two. Each one is the Creator, each one is Salvation, each one is God, each one is a Spirit. And they are to always be approached as if they were an inseparable Oneness.
It is not essential to be redundantly pronouncing the name of Jesus, when what is done is under the auspices of God and in obedience to Him.
This name "Jesus" is not God in and of its self.
This is why the Trinity terms are acceptable.
However to deny that the name "Jesus" is the name of God, is to be illogical and is contradictory of the deity of Christ.
Again - In Saint John, Jesus is declared to be the thought of God. (Logos) This view is seldom processed to any depth. Jesus is also said to have been given dominion and a name above every name, and He was begotten of God. He was with God and was God in the beginning. But what is this beginning? Was He still God even before the beginning? That nagging question again - We know that God always existed, yet Jesus was given His preeminence. God obviously has the power to lift up and to put down, but in the scriptures we see that He did elevate Christ and then Christ stood aside when His work was finished, so we could see that His ministry was God's. The beginning appears to speak only of creation. Christ was with God at the time of creation, and before the time of the fall. This is where the phrase, "before the foundation of the world comes in." The original meaning speaks of - before the fall, or before the degeneration of this world, - not before all creation. God has no beginning. To speak of Christ being in the beginning does not necessarily convey the same position relative to time as when saying God is eternal.
Jesus came in the flesh as the Son of God, and as God and said he would come and abide with us and would send the comforter to us. Jesus is not just some tissue, or a veil of flesh. He was an individual. He has came forth in some sense in the likeness of the first Adam. He had a special birth.
The comforter does not speak of Himself, but of Jesus. God told us to listen to His son and in conjunction with this the Holy Ghost teaches us about Jesus.
The Holy Spirit is a person, but he is also the Spirit of Christ. Jesus said he would send the comforter and he also said he would come and abide with us.
Jesus is the focus of the New Testament and is the God of the New Testament.
The Father is not the Son, nor is the Son the Father. For, there has been and always will be a distinction within the plurality of the Godhead. There has been a question among many free scholars concerning the Godhood of Christ. The bible emphatically declares him to be the Lord, and to have been given the preeminence, and to have been given a name that is above all others. (In all of this it can be truthfully said that Christ was never said to be the one true God. In every case it can be construed or understood that he was given the most exalted position and to be reverenced as if he was God and of a truth the Lord of the universe, yet not God Himself. Rather Jesus was and is the image and complete message and thought of God for this world. Yes, this is in the least controversial, and at the worst blasphemous, but these things condemnations cannot be said on the basis of the bible as it reads. For Jesus to be the One and Only True God, is to say that Mary was the mother of God and Jesus was His own Father. This is a basic matter of truth and logic.)
Again, Jesus is the name of our God. To argue against this point is to, in effect, stand against both the deity of Christ and the plain communication of the text. To have a problem with the deity of Christ is one thing, to have a problem with the clear statements of scripture is another. (In either case, how can we say that such problems means we are hell bound? Very few Christians agree on these subjects.)
If the Trinity is as defined in this article then that one (Triune) God has a singular descriptive name. This name is distinct from the other individual names of the positions and persons in the Godhead. If there is one singular name, a surname, then is has to be Jesus. Using the terms "triune and Trinity creates more problems then the use of them solves.
The definition of the name Jesus is descriptive of only one position and relationship; that of the one true God. The root meaning of the name Jesus is, "He Which Is.. ," or "The Self Existent One is our Salvation"- and as such refers to the totality and singularity of the one God and His name.
The Holy Ghost fathered Mary's Child (or created within her a fleshly tabernacle for himself, or for His message), and she received a specific name for her son from an Angel. This child was her Creator, her Son and the Son of God. There has to be some adjustments in our thinking and in our doctrines relative to the doctrine of the Godhead and as to just what and who Jesus was.
The Father Son and Holy Ghost are/is our salvation.
These terms can only refer to God.
Still, none of these terms focus on His oneness, singularity and totality. Rather, they speak of the individual distinctions of the persons in the Godhead. Though the terms Father and Son and Holy Ghost refer to the one God and are descriptive of His being, they are still not the singular primary name of God.
Please remember we are dealing with a mystery. We can have God revealed to us and receive him by faith, however, on the basis of scripture, we cannot visualize him.
In any case we are never to try to visualize him in the sense of saying we see Him and can describe Him completely, for this is an attempt to bring Him down to our level. This is why we are not to make an image of Him.
Today, in our society we are wrestling with political correctness in our words. The Church has been wrestling with theological correctness for centuries, most of which was based on tradition.
Now we have books that are encouraging us to develop a deeper relationship with the Holy Ghost. Then there are other books that are concerned with the neglect of the Father. This is directly related to our inability to accept Jesus as being our God. The Bible text alone should be the basis for correct terms. What commands have been issued by God and his apostles relative to the name that is above every name? What did the apostles preach and what was their usage and style relative to that name? What position before men has God given Christ? Jesus has always been with His father as a distinct person in the Godhead. Yet, not a separate person of, or from the Godhead. Jesus is the Son, yet always God. He is distinct, but never separate.
There is a portrayal and a perception of separation because of the distinction between the persons and their ministries. However, this is produced by the reality of the different persons positions and offices within the singular God or Godhead.
Still there is not a literal or actual separation of substratum or substance, for, from our perspective, they are in essence one God.
When Jesus was on earth God was in him and in heaven and filling the universe all at the same time.
The fullness of the Godhead dwells in Jesus Christ.
The persons and power and authority of the one true God, were/are, and is, in Christ.
Note; I use the terms substratum, substance, persons, offices and positions in want of better words. I did not originate the usage of these terms. If an adjustment is made in keeping with the text and we see that Jesus was made a little lower then angles and accept this then these statements began to make more sense. In that case Jesus was in God as the Logos at the time of the fall and was manifest after his birth. God's plan was the Logos. God's angel in the cloud was also God's logos. In each of these presentations of God they were to be honored as God but were not God. When they heard the Angel of the Lord they heard God, yet that angel, in some sense, was not God. Still they were to honor and reverence that angel as if it was God. In each instance God's message was the point.
Any suggestions or further clarifications would be appreciated?
The Father and the Son are both called Lord. However the Holy Ghost is seldom referred to as the Lord.
Note; - The Father is not called the Son and the Son is not called Father God, in the New Testament .
There is a plurality in the Godhead, but never a separation nor a division in essence. There are three who are one, but not three Gods. Again, In the same way that when the Angel of Jehovah was on earth dealing with Israel, He was considered as being Jehovah, and He was Jehovah. Yet, he prayed to the Jehovah that was in heaven.
Most of the Terms that are used to designate the individual persons of the Godhead are not all inclusive.
For instance to intelligibly describe the plurality of the Godhead, only one person in the Godhead can be called Father and only one person can be called the Holy Spirit and only one person can be called the Son.
If some non-Christian overheard you calling on the Lord God they would not necessarily know if you were addressing your prayer to the Son of God, or to the Father or to any one of many pagan Gods.
Jesus was called the Messiah, the Christ, the Savior and several other names. Only one of these, terms or singular names, includes all of the Godhead. This was the name Jesus. He was called Jesus because he would save his people.
He was called Jesus because this was the name that had the preeminence and was all inclusive of the Godhead. Philippians 2:9 Page 7 and 12.
A name above all others.
If you call out and say `Oh God!' You could have the one God or any of the three persons of the Godhead in mind or any one of the so called Gods of the pagans.
If you call out `Oh Jesus!' You could have the person of the Son of God in mind, rather then the singular God that was known to Abraham.
Still, when you call out the name "Jesus" in prayer it is clear to everyone that you are calling on the God of the Christian.
This name Jesus is only important because of who he is. The use of this name by and for other people has no bearing on its importance.
Though Jesus is a common name, we are not to stop revering the name of our God. There are also many Lords, supposed Gods and Christs. However, we are to still respect these terms whenever they refer to our God.
Again, - The name 'Jesus,' is all inclusive relative to the Godhead and is the one dominate name that is used to differentiate the Christian God from all other Gods.
This is a logical reason for admitting that Jesus is the all inclusive singular name of the Christian God.
I am not aware of any argument that can stand against this reasoning. Again - Jesus is the name that is above every other name and this name is universally considered the distinctive name of the Christian God.
There may be different spellings and pronunciations in other languages, yet it is the given name of the Son of God that is universally recognized as being the name of the Christian's God. To dogmatically revere a certain spelling or a certain pronunciation is to miss the point.
The name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost of the Old Testament was the singular name Jehovah. Or the I Am That I Am, or the Self Existent One.
God's Son inherited this name. So He goes by the name Jesus. Which means "Jehovah Is Salvation," or "The Self Existent One Is Our Salvation." Or, -
"He Who Is, Who Is Truly Present, Is Our Salvation."
These terms represent the intensely personal, hallowed singular name of the God of Abraham.
So in a sense ... YAHWEH and YAHWEH'S Son are both YAHWEH.
Again - The totality of God resides in Christ in a physical or tangible form. This does not stop God from filling the universe, or from being in some intangible sense a plurality.
Through the improper use of basic principles and traditions, men have deviated from the clear teachings of the Bible. This has caused them to set up points of unnecessary discrimination and to lower the proper position of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The original languages point to the Holy Spirit being the breath of God. The "the" is added. remove the "the" and you have the equivalent of "God's holy breath". This, if accepted, removes a lot of contention.
Please send any comments that you might have to the web address below. They would be appreciated. Also I beg you to be honest before God concerning these thoughts. I have received very few pro or con comments concerning this article, to date, and no written ones? Please be aware, this article is revised often. After I leave it for some period of time I work on it again. Note the dates at the bottom.
This article may be passed on and copied freely. But please keep the thoughts in context.
I can Hear someone say-
I Will Not Comply!! <g>
9-2-92 / 8-20-93 / 9-14-98 / 5-7-99 / 7-8-00 / 5-29-01 /08-02-01