HOW CAN WE SAY JESUS IS ONE WITH GOD AND STILL CONFESS A TRINITY?

[GKB]

I RELEASE THIS TO THE LORD, JESUS! BLESS YOU ALL! i am not angry, just a little disappointed

[GKB]

LET MW JUST SAY HAPPY NEW YEARS TO ALL OF YOU BROTHERS AND SISTERS....LETS TAKE A BREAK FROM REBUKING EACH OTHER!

[bluelake]

i understand matt 28, but have you read the instruction given after jesus was crucified? try acts 2:38-than peter said unto them, repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of jesus christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the holy ghost. you can also look at acts 8:12, acts 8:16, acts 19:4-5, and romans 6:3. these were the instruction given after jesus had gave up the ghost. it is because of the power in the name of jesus christ. the great commission was given while jesus was still here in the flesh, the new commission is given after he was rasied to glory. so pastors, and teachers, and reachers, how do you baptize?

I was reading the responses you have received about your inquirery, The Trinity.
The Bible clearly teaches the Trinity. I hope that you have taken the time to read the scriptures given to you.
It has been my experience dialoging with oneness pentecostals that they aren't open to the word of God.
I will suggest a link for you to read, if you wish. It offers a great deal of information about this issue.

I would baptize using the method that Christ himself gave us. Oneness use Acts 2:38 because they deny the Trinity.

http://letusreason.org/Oneness9.htm

God bless you,
bluelake

[Marv]

GKB,

The explanations have been pretty orthodox but maybe not too satisfying.

One thing to remember is that languages didn't really have anything to describe the revealed nature of God, because there isn't anything else that is like he is, at least not that we know.  So all the examples and such used are "off".  We can use wordly example to try and get closer to understanding but they all fall short of being a perfect example.

Now one thing that came up is the "Oneness" people.  They believe something called modalism.  That would be that God is in one mode (similar to the person of Trinity doctrine) at a time.  So you had God in heaven as the Father, and then He came down as Jesus.  So Jesus was God and the only God while he was here.  Then he went away and came back as the Holy Spirit.  They hold on to the truth that God is one really tightly, but they kind of ignore the places where we see the Father, Son and Spirit at the same time.

One thing I find that confuses people is the use of the term "person" we are used to thinking of separate persons as separate beings.  That really isn't what is in view.  "Person" comes from "persona" the persona is the various masks that an actor would use during a play to be different characters.  Actors would even have conversations with themselves by lifting up the different masks to cover their face.  One play might have a single actor presenting several different persons through the use of different personas.

So if we take that a little way, we see that God is like the actor, and he appears to us in several different persons or personas.  The major difference is that God is all those personas or persons at the same time, see not perfect, can't go too far with the example.

We have to understand God in a way that keeps all that he reveals as truth.  For instance, God is one.  If the Father, Son and Holy Spirit were three gods, then that truth isn't understood correctly.

We end up with one God and three persons.  Each of those person is God, each has all the characteristics of God.  It becomes tempting to think that there is one Supreme God, usually taken as the Father and the Son and Holy Spirit are somehow lesser gods, but that doesn't agree with scripture either.

The Trinity is the only teaching that keeps all that God reveals of Himself as truth.  Otherwise you have to discard something.  It is difficult to understand and that would be why people have and continue to come up with so many other explanations.

One place that I will mention because is confuses a lot of people is the "begotten" issue.  It gets confusing when it is said that Jesus is begotten of the Father because we see places like the first Chapter of Matthew where the verb begat is used of an earthly father and son or daughter type of relationship.

The word translated as begotten is mongenes.  It was thougt to be a conjunction of mono meaning one and a form of the verb gennao meaning to begat or bear.  Well linguistic study has shown that if that were the case, the word should be monogennetos, not monogenes.  The term doesn't mean Jesus was God's only born Son, but has to do with the word genos which means kind or class.  So what it is saying is that Jesus is one-of-a-kind, unique, it's not talking about God the Father producing Jesus in the way a father produces a son.

We can see that in another verse that uses the term monogenes.

Hebrews 11:17 KJV
(17)  By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,

If you think about it, Isaac isn't the only son whom Abraham has begat or borne.  What he is is Abraham's one-and-only uniqe son from the promise God gave Abraham.  There is no other like him.  We see new translations giving that understanding more clearly.

Hebrews 11:17 ISV
(17)  By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered Isaac. The man who had received the promises was about to offer his unique son,

People get real irate about it.  Especially since begotten happened to be in John 3:16 which so many of us memorized as children and somehow it is seen as an attack on orthodox understanding.  Actually what I see is a case where the balance of scripture protected from a misunderstanding from that single word, but there are many who are indeed tripped up by that one word because they give it too much weight.  People say if Jesus is begotten then the Father is first and foremost and they go down the road of multiple gods or lesser gods or even that Jesus isn't really God but a god or not a god at all but a mediator between God and man.

I hope that helps you understand.

Marv

[TEXASGRANDMA]

We are a trinity.  We are body, spirit, and mind.  But when you see me coming, you say Hi Betty, not hi Betty spirit, Betty mind, etc.
  I have no problem with believing in the Trinity of God.
betty

[dp]

Question:  Is there any of the world's religions that have God as The Savior Who came in the flesh and died on the cross? The answer is no, only Christ Jesus. And per Hebrews 1 that's why He is called The only Begotten Son, for His Mission as The Savior to come in the flesh to die on the cross for the remission of sins. That Mission as Only Begotten Son is a distinction of God's Role as The Savior. It is a distinction between God The Father and God The Son, even though both are always One.

The non-believing Jews still refuse Jesus of Nazareth as God's Promised Savior, but didn't their fathers know? Yes, they knew, but their hearts being hardened refused to believe it as written in the Old Testament Books. So Who do they believe on? They still await Messiah, having remained only on The Father. And there's the rub.

I Jn 2:23
23   Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.
(KJV)

This is why it's important to recogize God as The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit as written. To accept The Son is to recognize The Father also. They cannot be separated. And just becaue the non-believing Jews still deny The Son, but not The Father, it's a dillemma for them, for "Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father" as written.

So in turn, focusing only on Jesus MUST include accepting The Father also, and that should mean grasping the Old Testament prophecy about The Promised Savior and God's Plan of Salvation given through His Holy prophets. We as Christians are not some separate entity from the Old Testament Patriarchs which believed The Gospel as we have (Galatians 3 and Hebrews 11). According to Paul in Galatians 3, all those who have believed on Jesus Christ as The Savior have become the 'children of Abraham'. How's that? It's because The Gospel was preached to Abraham also, and he believed as we have. He just didn't get to live to the time to see Christ's first coming.

1 Cor 10:1-4
1   Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
2   And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
3   And did all eat the same spiritual meat;
4   And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
(KJV)

So just because Jesus hadn't come yet in Moses' day, many since Abraham still knew of The Gospel of Jesus Christ, and those believed as we also. The Salvation Promise to Abraham was given first, even 400 years before the Old Covenant (Gen.14). Although one will not find our Lord's Name 'Jesus' in the Old Testament Books, He was well written of and known of by God's OT prophets (Luke 24:27).

Too often I see ideas like the "Oneness" doctrines and God's Israel vs. Christ's Church being used to create divisions that are not supposed to exist between believers on Christ Jesus. The Old Testament Books and New Testament Books go together, and should be understood together. With focusing only on the New Testament Books which mention our Lord Jesus' Mission in fulfillment, a much fuller understanding of His overall Plan of Salvation will be missed. As an example, the Old Testament Ezekiel 40 through 48 Chapters are still yet future to us, and begin at Jesus' second coming to this earth.

Others here have raised questions about doctrines like the "Oneness" ideas, and rightly so, because for the antichrist to be successful in deceiving the whole world in the future towards worshipping him in place of God, some religious theology must be devised to bring all the world's faiths together. And that is happening now in our time through the 'inter-faith' movement.

dp