Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!
  • Welcome to Talk Jesus Christian Forums

    Celebrating 20 Years!

    A bible based, Jesus Christ centered community.

    Register Log In

Are some people predestined for hell no matter what they do.

29 The God of Jews only is He, and not also of nations?
30 yes, also of nations; since one is God who shall declare righteous the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through the faith (Rom. 3:29-30 YLT)
@Butch5 -- you certainly are stuck on the Jews. Are you by chance Jewish?
Hi Sue,

No, I'm not Jewish. I just study the Scriptures in context. Today Christians are taught to proof text. Jesus said salvation is of the Jews. Everything about salvation comes through the Jews. a lot of Christians don't seem to know that. Paul said,

29 The God of Jews only is He, and not also of nations?
30 yes, also of nations; since one is God who shall declare righteous the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through the faith (Rom. 3:29-30 YLT)

The Gentiles are saved through the faith of the Jews. It's not talking about the Jews having faith in the Gospel. It's talking about teaching.
 
Verse 30 is all past tense. It's because God had done all of those things for the Jews he foreknew.
Rom 1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

The book of Romans was written to all who have been called of God, both Jews, and gentiles!

Rom 9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
 
Rom 1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

The book of Romans was written to all who have been called of God, both Jews, and gentiles!

Rom 9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
Do you read what I wrote to Sue? Paul opens the book with addressing the church in general. However, in chapter 2 verse 17 he turns his attention to the Jews. He continues this discourse until chapter 11 verse 13 where he turns his attention to the Gentiles. Between these chapters Paul is talking about the Jews. That's evidence by statements like, Abraham our father according to the flesh.

17 Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, (Rom. 2:17 KJV)

13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.
(Rom. 11:13-14 KJV)
 
Do you read what I wrote to Sue? Paul opens the book by addressing the church in general. However, in chapter 2 verse 17 he turns his attention to the Jews. He continues this discourse until chapter 11 verse 13 where he turns his attention to the Gentiles. Between these chapters, Paul is talking about the Jews. That's evidenced by statements like, Abraham our father according to the flesh.

17 Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, (Rom. 2:17 KJV)

13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh and might save some of them.
(Rom. 11:13-14 KJV)

Abraham was not a jew, he was a gentile which God had chosen to become the father of the circumcision (Jews), and the uncircumcised. (gentiles) The Jews did not exist until many years after Abraham. The word “Jew” is a shorted form of the word meaning “Judah”

So, the word "Jew" is short for the word "Judean," meaning a resident of Judea, the area also now called Palestine. The word "Jew" did not mean an ethnic background or race.

The word “Hebrew” is not associated with Jew's, it is a word that describes a person who goes from one place to another. Abraham was called a “Hebrew” not because he was Jewish, but because he crossed over the river “Euphrates” to get to the Promised Land God had given him.

Abraham, though often called the "father of the Jewish nation," was a Chaldean, from Ur of the Chaldees an area of Babylon as was his wife, Sarah. Abraham is referred to as a Hebrew:

"And there came one that had escaped and told Abram the
Hebrew ..." (Gen 14:13)

“Hebrew” means "one from beyond" and is derived from Eber (or Heber, Strong's no. 5676) meaning "the region beyond" (the Euphrates)

The term Hebrew also is taken to mean "to pass" or "to cross over." Abraham "crossed over" the River Euphrates to get to the land of Canaan, from Chaldea. Chaldean was Abraham's ethnic origin. He Abraham lived long before there was ever was a Jew.

Abraham is the father of anyone who walks after the same faith steps as Abraham did!

Rom 4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that HE MIGHT BE THE FATHER OF ALL THEM THAT BELIEVE, though they are not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
Rom 4:12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but WHO ALSO WALK IN THE STEPS OF THAT FAITH OF OUR FATHER ABRAHAM, which he had being yet uncircumcised.

The nation of Israel who was descendants of Issac who begat Jacob whose name was changed to “Israel” by God were “Hebrews” because they crossed the “Red Sea” on their way to get to the promised land from Egypt. When they left Egypt, Israel was made up of many ethnic groups who intermarried yet as a group they were still called Israel.

Exo 12:37 And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that was men, beside children.
Exo 12:38 And A MIXED MULTITUDE WENT UP ALSO WITH THEM; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.

As a Christian we have passed over from death to life, darkness to light, delivered from the power of darkness and translated into the Kingdom of God's dear Son.(1 John 3:14)(Col 1:13)(Eph 5:8)
 
Abraham was not a jew, he was a gentile which God had chosen to become the father of the circumcision (Jews), and the uncircumcised. (gentiles) The Jews did not exist until many years after Abraham. The word “Jew” is a shorted form of the word meaning “Judah”

So, the word "Jew" is short for the word "Judean," meaning a resident of Judea, the area also now called Palestine. The word "Jew" did not mean an ethnic background or race.

The word “Hebrew” is not associated with Jew's, it is a word that describes a person who goes from one place to another. Abraham was called a “Hebrew” not because he was Jewish, but because he crossed over the river “Euphrates” to get to the Promised Land God had given him.

Abraham, though often called the "father of the Jewish nation," was a Chaldean, from Ur of the Chaldees an area of Babylon as was his wife, Sarah. Abraham is referred to as a Hebrew:

"And there came one that had escaped and told Abram the
Hebrew ..." (Gen 14:13)

“Hebrew” means "one from beyond" and is derived from Eber (or Heber, Strong's no. 5676) meaning "the region beyond" (the Euphrates)

The term Hebrew also is taken to mean "to pass" or "to cross over." Abraham "crossed over" the River Euphrates to get to the land of Canaan, from Chaldea. Chaldean was Abraham's ethnic origin. He Abraham lived long before there was ever was a Jew.

Abraham is the father of anyone who walks after the same faith steps as Abraham did!

Rom 4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that HE MIGHT BE THE FATHER OF ALL THEM THAT BELIEVE, though they are not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
Rom 4:12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but WHO ALSO WALK IN THE STEPS OF THAT FAITH OF OUR FATHER ABRAHAM, which he had being yet uncircumcised.

The nation of Israel who was descendants of Issac who begat Jacob whose name was changed to “Israel” by God were “Hebrews” because they crossed the “Red Sea” on their way to get to the promised land from Egypt. When they left Egypt, Israel was made up of many ethnic groups who intermarried yet as a group they were still called Israel.

Exo 12:37 And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that was men, beside children.
Exo 12:38 And A MIXED MULTITUDE WENT UP ALSO WITH THEM; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.

As a Christian we have passed over from death to life, darkness to light, delivered from the power of darkness and translated into the Kingdom of God's dear Son.(1 John 3:14)(Col 1:13)(Eph 5:8)

OK, can we get back to the topic at hand? Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are known as the fathers of the Jewish nation. Jesus said salvation is of the Jews. That all started with Abraham.

As I said, Paul opens his letter to the church in Rome in general. Then in chapter 2 verse 17 he turns his attention to and begins addressing the Jews. He continues this discourse through to chapter 11 verse 13 where he turns his attention to the Gentiles. That God is the God of both Jew and Gentile has no bearing on who Paul is addressing in the letter.
 
Greetings Curtis,

not so sure that Abraham was a gentile, strictly speaking. Could be pedantic but thought i would inquire.
Not saying he was a Jew, though. As you explained, that was not possible. for Israel and descendants were still a far twinkle in his eye.


Bless you ....><>
 
Are some people destined for Hell no matter what they do?
Maybe they Blasphemied the Holy spirit? Or thought some thing very bad sacrilegious, or something.
Can these sins be repented of?
What are the people who are destined for darkness?-- unbelievers, haters of God almighty, or people who sin after receiving the Holy spirit?
Who exactly are they
What is the Blasphemy of the Holy spirit?

People are only destined to hell by their CHOICES. Don’t believe in the Calvinistic lie that God has somehow created certain people to go to hell. That makes God an evil deity which we all know is blasphemy. God created all people with free will, and with His foreknowledge He already knows who will choose good and evil before they are born. So based on this foreknowledge, He predestined those who will choose good to be conformed to the image of His Son. This is what the NT teaches.

The blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is a deliberate act attributing the work of the Holy Spirit to the devil. It is not forgivable because those Pharisees who blasphemed did it even though they know full well that Jesus’ ministry is from God. Yet in order to discredit Jesus, they spoke blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Their words of blasphemy were not words of ignorance, but pure evil.
 
People are only destined to hell by their CHOICES. Don’t believe in the Calvinistic lie that God has somehow created certain people to go to hell. That makes God an evil deity which we all know is blasphemy. God created all people with free will, and with His foreknowledge He already knows who will choose good and evil before they are born. So based on this foreknowledge, He predestined those who will choose good to be conformed to the image of His Son. This is what the NT teaches.

The blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is a deliberate act attributing the work of the Holy Spirit to the devil. It is not forgivable because those Pharisees who blasphemed did it even though they know full well that Jesus’ ministry is from God. Yet in order to discredit Jesus, they spoke blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Their words of blasphemy were not words of ignorance, but pure evil.

Amen
 
@Enxu -- Mr. Calvin who developed Calvinism was but a mere man. A lot of people have accepted his views as being as inspired as God's Word.

God Does have all-knowledge , so He Does know who will and who Won't accept His gift of salvation. He knows those who Are His.
 
@Enxu -- Mr. Calvin who developed Calvinism was but a mere man. A lot of people have accepted his views as being as inspired as God's Word.

God Does have all-knowledge , so He Does know who will and who Won't accept His gift of salvation. He knows those who Are His.

Which is why I don’t subscribe to men’s teachings anymore whether its Calvinism or trinity.

Many are and will be proven as false!
 
You are reading God's Inspired Word to all of us.

Calvin's concepts of Scripture are Not inspired. It's simply how he chose to interpret Scripture.

God's Word IS Truth. The Trinity is God's Word . IF you choose to attribute the teaching of the trinity as a false teaching -- you are - in effect -- throwing out salvation. Do you Really want to be doing that?
 
You are reading God's Inspired Word to all of us.

Calvin's concepts of Scripture are Not inspired. It's simply how he chose to interpret Scripture.

God's Word IS Truth. The Trinity is God's Word . IF you choose to attribute the teaching of the trinity as a false teaching -- you are - in effect -- throwing out salvation. Do you Really want to be doing that?

The trinity is an extra biblical doctrine that emerged only in the second century of the church under the Roman Catholic Church. This is attested by many historians, including those who supported the trinity doctrine. Many of them also admitted that there was no Scriptural backing to the trinity concept.

Furthermore with regards to salvation, the Gospel said it is dependent on faith in Jesus Christ, not agreement to a doctrine called trinity. The very fact that the Roman Catholic Church made such a condemning statement about an essentially pseudo-Christian pagan- rooted doctrine speaks to the sinister origin of the trinity doctrine.

Jesus never said if anyone does not believe in the trinity doctrine they are not saved.
 
The Roman Catholic Church does NOT support Scripture in many of It's teachings. The RCC has many teachings that are contrary To Scripture.

IF you want Truth -- stick To Scripture

Yes, salvation -- where a person places their faith. In Jesus Christ. But Who / What does a person believe About Jesus Christ is Also very important.

A person Could believe that Jesus Christ was just a good religious teacher in the New Testament. Is That belief going to bring about their salvation? No.

And, of Course Jesus never said That -- He didn't have to. He Is part Of the trinity. That is how He could Be our Savior.
 
The Roman Catholic Church does NOT support Scripture in many of It's teachings. The RCC has many teachings that are contrary To Scripture.

IF you want Truth -- stick To Scripture

Yes, salvation -- where a person places their faith. In Jesus Christ. But Who / What does a person believe About Jesus Christ is Also very important.

A person Could believe that Jesus Christ was just a good religious teacher in the New Testament. Is That belief going to bring about their salvation? No.

And, of Course Jesus never said That -- He didn't have to. He Is part Of the trinity. That is how He could Be our Savior.
Hi Sue,

You say people aren't inspired and say stick to Scripture. We have to remember that when you say that, it's a person's "interpretation" of Scripture. If someone reads Scripture and interprets it wrongly their interpretation isn't Scripture. The Bible can't explain what the writer meant. Therefore what one reads is interpreted by that person.

People read Scripture and infer things that are not there. That is not Scripure, it's an inference. The Trinity doctrine is an inference. It's not stated in Scripture and can be shown to be wrong. I don't have time at the moment but maybe later this evening I'll have time to post on this. In the meantime I'll leave with this question. Who is Jesus' Father?
 
The Roman Catholic Church does NOT support Scripture in many of It's teachings. The RCC has many teachings that are contrary To Scripture.

Ok Sue, you don’t support the RCC. Yet you support the doctrine of trinity, which was officialised by the RCC under very condemning and strict rules against those who dare oppose it. Confusing much??

Like Butch said, the trinity doctrine is an inference, and then the Scriptures is falsely interpreted to support that inference. I also showed you that RCC, in support of the trinity doctrine, even changed the original baptism formula “in the name of Jesus Christ” to the trinity formula and also amended the Scriptures which talked about baptism. These things were all done by the RCC which you say don’t support Scripture.

Yes, salvation -- where a person places their faith. In Jesus Christ. But Who / What does a person believe About Jesus Christ is Also very important.

A person Could believe that Jesus Christ was just a good religious teacher in the New Testament. Is That belief going to bring about their salvation? No.

I believe everything that the Gospel said about Jesus as the Son of God, Word became flesh, Son of Man, Lord and Messiah etc. I believe that He took on the sins of mankind, was sinless Himself yet was put to death on the cross and resurrected to life on the third day after He died. His blood washes away the sins of those who believe in Him. I have said those truths over and over whether here or elsewhere. I never once said Jesus was just a teacher or prophet. The trinity false doctrine has absolutely no bearing on what I believe about Jesus.
 
Last edited:
Hi Sue,

You say people aren't inspired and say stick to Scripture. We have to remember that when you say that, it's a person's "interpretation" of Scripture. If someone reads Scripture and interprets it wrongly their interpretation isn't Scripture. The Bible can't explain what the writer meant. Therefore what one reads is interpreted by that person.

People read Scripture and infer things that are not there. That is not Scripure, it's an inference. The Trinity doctrine is an inference. It's not stated in Scripture and can be shown to be wrong. I don't have time at the moment but maybe later this evening I'll have time to post on this. In the meantime I'll leave with this question. Who is Jesus' Father?

Hi Butch, the Lord bless...

I know this was directed to Sue but I would like to share what I discovered when having a similar concern years ago I took the time to really dig deep into the Hebrew Scriptures and exegeting the Scriptures, and exploring the earliest Hebrew understandings and traditions, found the language used by the Nicene council (one ousia in three hypostases) to be exactly what the idea of the Tri-Unity of God was saying. So YES the word "trinity" is NOT found in the Scriptures but the but the fact that the one and only God (YHVH) revealed Himself in these three ways is Biblically sound. Now do not forget they had no New Covenant writings when Christ taught the Apostles and the Apostles went out to preach and teach (except perhaps the Hebrew Aramaic Matthew since none of the other books and letters had yet been written).

You see it isn't that the Father is YHVH and the Son is not, not the Son YHVH and not the Father, it is that there is ONLY ONE YHVH and He has revealed Himself to us as the Father, the Word/Son, and the Holy Spirit. Here is a great first clue...Jesus said (assuming one believes Jesus) that NO ONE has ever seen the Father (yet YHVH appears to many, many times, in diverse forms, throughout the Old Covenant writings)...in fact in John 1:18 we read "No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is Himself God and is at the Father's side, has made Him known." Thus what He reveled here is that every time someone saw YHVH in a revealed form (as a man, as the Angel of the LORD, as the Shekinah glory, the bush that burned, and so on) it was actually the Word/Son...He empohasizes this again in John 5:37 where He teaches "And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.

The Father is YHVH apart from His creation of whom He is the Father of all creation...the Word/Son is that very same YHVH in seeable hearable form (though in Christ this is unique because He is manifest INCARNATE in an actual human baby) and the Holy Spirit is that same YHVH in a way we can feel, experience, be guided by, be empowered by, etc. One Ousia (YHVH) in three hypostases (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit).

The Jewish Rabbis understood this perfectly in the 1st and early 2nd centuries they just did not (would not) believe Jesus was this Word/Son....


From before the time that Jesus was born, and I can only conjecture since the time of Ezra and the formation of Synagogue system, various Rabbis often debated and commented on various passages from the Tanakh. The summation of their perspectives and oral commentaries were represented and brought out in the Targums (100 B.C. to 200 A.D.). These were considered by many as nearly as authoritative as the Scriptures themselves! Sometimes different Rabbis brought out more subtle shades of meaning, and still others offered more unique renditions, supporting the traditions and teachings of their particular school of thought (of which there were a few) but in most places the Targums agreed.

It takes little effort to see that this "Word of God" was actually believed by the Jewish Targumim to be none other than YHVH Himself manifest (either in the flesh or as a theophany). We Christians call this unique person of the Godhead “the Son“. The reference to “Son” is actually also from pre-Christian Hebrew tradition (see Enoch, 105: 2; IV Esdras 7:28-29; 13:32, 37, 52; 14:9, and more). The tag “son” or “son of”, in the Hebrew culture, referred more to likeness or role rather than a progressive biological lineage. The “sons of Belial” were not literally Belial’s children in a biological sense. But who they are is very real and very important. In the world they are as Belial.

The pre-Christian Jewish Rabbis understood and believed in the Word of YHVH (the Word of Son) in fact John 1 was speaking directly to the Rabbis of the diaspora
 
Hi Butch, the Lord bless...

I know this was directed to Sue but I would like to share what I discovered when having a similar concern years ago I took the time to really dig deep into the Hebrew Scriptures and exegeting the Scriptures, and exploring the earliest Hebrew understandings and traditions, found the language used by the Nicene council (one ousia in three hypostases) to be exactly what the idea of the Tri-Unity of God was saying. So YES the word "trinity" is NOT found in the Scriptures but the but the fact that the one and only God (YHVH) revealed Himself in these three ways is Biblically sound. Now do not forget they had no New Covenant writings when Christ taught the Apostles and the Apostles went out to preach and teach (except perhaps the Hebrew Aramaic Matthew since none of the other books and letters had yet been written).

You see it isn't that the Father is YHVH and the Son is not, not the Son YHVH and not the Father, it is that there is ONLY ONE YHVH and He has revealed Himself to us as the Father, the Word/Son, and the Holy Spirit. Here is a great first clue...Jesus said (assuming one believes Jesus) that NO ONE has ever seen the Father (yet YHVH appears to many, many times, in diverse forms, throughout the Old Covenant writings)...in fact in John 1:18 we read "No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is Himself God and is at the Father's side, has made Him known." Thus what He reveled here is that every time someone saw YHVH in a revealed form (as a man, as the Angel of the LORD, as the Shekinah glory, the bush that burned, and so on) it was actually the Word/Son...He empohasizes this again in John 5:37 where He teaches "And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.

The Father is YHVH apart from His creation of whom He is the Father of all creation...the Word/Son is that very same YHVH in seeable hearable form (though in Christ this is unique because He is manifest INCARNATE in an actual human baby) and the Holy Spirit is that same YHVH in a way we can feel, experience, be guided by, be empowered by, etc. One Ousia (YHVH) in three hypostases (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit).

The Jewish Rabbis understood this perfectly in the 1st and early 2nd centuries they just did not (would not) believe Jesus was this Word/Son....


From before the time that Jesus was born, and I can only conjecture since the time of Ezra and the formation of Synagogue system, various Rabbis often debated and commented on various passages from the Tanakh. The summation of their perspectives and oral commentaries were represented and brought out in the Targums (100 B.C. to 200 A.D.). These were considered by many as nearly as authoritative as the Scriptures themselves! Sometimes different Rabbis brought out more subtle shades of meaning, and still others offered more unique renditions, supporting the traditions and teachings of their particular school of thought (of which there were a few) but in most places the Targums agreed.

It takes little effort to see that this "Word of God" was actually believed by the Jewish Targumim to be none other than YHVH Himself manifest (either in the flesh or as a theophany). We Christians call this unique person of the Godhead “the Son“. The reference to “Son” is actually also from pre-Christian Hebrew tradition (see Enoch, 105: 2; IV Esdras 7:28-29; 13:32, 37, 52; 14:9, and more). The tag “son” or “son of”, in the Hebrew culture, referred more to likeness or role rather than a progressive biological lineage. The “sons of Belial” were not literally Belial’s children in a biological sense. But who they are is very real and very important. In the world they are as Belial.

The pre-Christian Jewish Rabbis understood and believed in the Word of YHVH (the Word of Son) in fact John 1 was speaking directly to the Rabbis of the diaspora

You have forgotten that an essential part of the trinity false doctrine is that it says the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are EQUAL. The Gospel shows that even the Father is not equal to the Son.

My Father is GREATER than I. - Jesus

The HEAD of Christ is God. - Paul
 
Ok Sue, you don’t support the RCC. Yet you support the doctrine of trinity, which was officialised by the RCC under very condemning and strict rules against those who dare oppose it. Confusing much??

Like Butch said, the trinity doctrine is an inference, and then the Scriptures is falsely interpreted to support that inference. I also showed you that RCC, in support of the trinity doctrine, even changed the original baptism formula “in the name of Jesus Christ” to the trinity formula and also amended the Scriptures which talked about baptism. These things were all done by the RCC which you say don’t support Scripture.



I believe everything that the Gospel said about Jesus as the Son of God, Word became flesh, Son of Man, Lord and Messiah etc. I believe that He took on the sins of mankind, was sinless Himself yet was put to death on the cross and resurrected to life on the third day after He died. His blood washes away the sins of those who believe in Him. I have said those truths over and over whether here or elsewhere. I never once said Jesus was just a teacher or prophet. The trinity false doctrine has absolutely no bearing on what I believe about Jesus.


You're right -- I do Not support the RCC. They teach Many things that are Contrary to Scripture. They Do have a few things right -- but the trinity teaching did Not come From them. The teaching Of the trinity -- well -- as has been commented on -- the term 'trinity' won't be found in Scripture -- but it's 'found' all through Scripture. The term "Godhead" IS in Scripture. Just as the term 'rapture' is not found in Scripture -- but it's Described in Scripture.

In another thread -- you questioned what the Holy Spirit is. It's part of the trinity / Godhead. The Holy Spirit came up Mary so that she conceived Jesus. The Holy Spirit comes to indwell the believer at the moment of salvation and keeps our soul 'safe' until we are with Jesus Christ. A very important part Of the Godhead.
 
Hi Butch, the Lord bless...

I know this was directed to Sue but I would like to share what I discovered when having a similar concern years ago I took the time to really dig deep into the Hebrew Scriptures and exegeting the Scriptures, and exploring the earliest Hebrew understandings and traditions, found the language used by the Nicene council (one ousia in three hypostases) to be exactly what the idea of the Tri-Unity of God was saying. So YES the word "trinity" is NOT found in the Scriptures but the but the fact that the one and only God (YHVH) revealed Himself in these three ways is Biblically sound. Now do not forget they had no New Covenant writings when Christ taught the Apostles and the Apostles went out to preach and teach (except perhaps the Hebrew Aramaic Matthew since none of the other books and letters had yet been written).

You see it isn't that the Father is YHVH and the Son is not, not the Son YHVH and not the Father, it is that there is ONLY ONE YHVH and He has revealed Himself to us as the Father, the Word/Son, and the Holy Spirit. Here is a great first clue...Jesus said (assuming one believes Jesus) that NO ONE has ever seen the Father (yet YHVH appears to many, many times, in diverse forms, throughout the Old Covenant writings)...in fact in John 1:18 we read "No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is Himself God and is at the Father's side, has made Him known." Thus what He reveled here is that every time someone saw YHVH in a revealed form (as a man, as the Angel of the LORD, as the Shekinah glory, the bush that burned, and so on) it was actually the Word/Son...He empohasizes this again in John 5:37 where He teaches "And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.

The Father is YHVH apart from His creation of whom He is the Father of all creation...the Word/Son is that very same YHVH in seeable hearable form (though in Christ this is unique because He is manifest INCARNATE in an actual human baby) and the Holy Spirit is that same YHVH in a way we can feel, experience, be guided by, be empowered by, etc. One Ousia (YHVH) in three hypostases (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit).

The Jewish Rabbis understood this perfectly in the 1st and early 2nd centuries they just did not (would not) believe Jesus was this Word/Son....


From before the time that Jesus was born, and I can only conjecture since the time of Ezra and the formation of Synagogue system, various Rabbis often debated and commented on various passages from the Tanakh. The summation of their perspectives and oral commentaries were represented and brought out in the Targums (100 B.C. to 200 A.D.). These were considered by many as nearly as authoritative as the Scriptures themselves! Sometimes different Rabbis brought out more subtle shades of meaning, and still others offered more unique renditions, supporting the traditions and teachings of their particular school of thought (of which there were a few) but in most places the Targums agreed.

It takes little effort to see that this "Word of God" was actually believed by the Jewish Targumim to be none other than YHVH Himself manifest (either in the flesh or as a theophany). We Christians call this unique person of the Godhead “the Son“. The reference to “Son” is actually also from pre-Christian Hebrew tradition (see Enoch, 105: 2; IV Esdras 7:28-29; 13:32, 37, 52; 14:9, and more). The tag “son” or “son of”, in the Hebrew culture, referred more to likeness or role rather than a progressive biological lineage. The “sons of Belial” were not literally Belial’s children in a biological sense. But who they are is very real and very important. In the world they are as Belial.

The pre-Christian Jewish Rabbis understood and believed in the Word of YHVH (the Word of Son) in fact John 1 was speaking directly to the Rabbis of the diaspora


Hi Brother Paul,

I agree with some of what you've said here. The Son is referred to as Yahweh. However, it can be shown that the Trinity doctrine of today is not Biblical. I posed the question; who is Jesus' Father? That's where I would start. I hope to have time later on today to address it further. What you're suggesting is called Modalism.
 
Last edited:
Jesus's legally recognized human father was Joseph. His divine Father was the Holy Spirit. And God the Father is the 1st part of the trinity / Godhead.
 
Back
Top